J Street, a self-described pro-Israel, pro-peace organization, is urging the Biden administration to withhold offensive weapons from the Jewish state, arguing that the United States needs to hold Israel accountable for alleged human rights “violations” before US President-elect Donald Trump takes office in January.

On Monday, J Street posted a thread on X/Twitter arguing that the Biden administration has a legal obligation to “pause” arms transfers to Israel until the Jewish state abides by international “human rights standards.” The progressive organization suggested that, with “Trump’s presidency looming,” the White House should review Israel’s conduct over the course of its military campaign against the Palestinian terrorist group Hamas in Gaza and “make immediate, clear, fair determinations on violations of US and international law.”

“This is the same standard for all recipients of US aid. Nothing more, nothing less. No new laws or new conditions specific to Israel are required, and this would not affect the Iron Dome or other defensive systems. We urge the admin. to swiftly comply with current domestic law,” J-Street wrote.

The organization recommended the Biden administration pressure Israel into resuming hostage and ceasefire negotiations by making clear “certain offensive weapons will be withheld” if the Jewish state does not make “good-faith” efforts to end the ongoing war in Hamas-ruled Gaza.

J Street’s comments came after US Secretary of State Antony Blinken said last week that Hamas, which launched the war with its invasion of and massacre across southern Israel last Oct. 7, rejected a proposal for a short-term ceasefire in exchange for the release of some Israeli hostages.

Israel has repeatedly underscored its efforts to accelerate humanitarian aid into Gaza, where Hamas has employed a military strategy of putting its command centers and weapons stockpiles in or underneath civilian sites such as schools, hospitals, and apartment buildings. According to experts and the Israeli military, the purpose of Hamas’s placement is to use civilians as human shields, forcing Israel to kill them in order to fight the terrorist group.

Israel says it has gone to unprecedented lengths to try and avoid civilian casualties, noting its efforts to evacuate areas before it targets them and to warn residents of impending military operations with leaflets, text messages, and other forms of communication. However, Hamas has in many cases prevented people from leaving, according to the Israel Defense Forces (IDF).

Last month, Blinken and US Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin sent a letter to then-Israeli Defense Minister Yoav Gallant and Strategic Affairs Minister Ron Dermer, urging them to implement several humanitarian policy changes in Gaza within 30 days or risk “implications” for US policy, including an arms embargo.

Following the message, Israel has boosted the amount of humanitarian aid trucks entering Gaza. This week, the Israeli government approved a series of measures that will vastly expand the entry of aid into the war-torn enclave, including by reopening another border crossing.

“This week is the deadline set by Secretaries Austin and Blinken in their October letter raising serious concerns about the Netanyahu gov’t blocking humanitarian aid and violating human rights. We urge the admin. to take fair, consequential action, as foreshadowed in the letter,” J Street posted on X/Twitter.

Experts have chided the Biden administration for providing “no evidence” that Israel is deliberately denying humanitarian aid to civilians in Gaza. Nonetheless, the US is set to judge Israel’s progress on Gaza aid by the end of this week. 

J-Street has attempted to balance maintaining a Zionist identity while calling for harsher treatment of the Jewish state. The group’s president, Jeremy Ben-Ami, issued a statement arguing that although the US should continue to support Israel, it should not give the Jewish state a “blank check.” The group has called for a “clear” and “consistent” approach to US military aid to Israel.

Many pro-Israel advocates have criticized J Street for being, in their view, insufficiently supportive of the Jewish state, noting the organization has previously defended Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN), one of the most outspoken anti-Israel lawmakers in the US Congress, and often castigated the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), the foremost pro-Israel lobbying group in the US.

The post J Street Calls for Partial US Arms Embargo Against Israel first appeared on Algemeiner.com.

“Nearly 70% of those killed are women and children” screams the headline of a Nov. 8th article in the Guardian by Sarah Johnson. [emphasis added]

The dramatic claim is then walked back in the opening sentence, which notes that the 70% figure relates narrowly to “verified deaths.”

Nearly 70% of the people killed in the war in Gaza are women and children, according to a UN analysis of verified deaths that highlights the heavy civilian toll of the conflict. [emphasis added]

By the second and third paragraphs, we see more evidence that the shocking 70% figure in the headline is not accurate, as it turns out that only 8,119 deaths (out of what Hamas claims is 43,000) have been verified.

In a new report, the most detailed analysis of its kind yet, the UN human rights office said it had verified 8,119 of those killed during the first six months of the war in Gaza. Of the fatalities, 3,588 were children and 2,036 were women.

The number marks deaths verified so far and is therefore lower than the figure of 43,000 deaths provided by Palestinian health authorities for the 13-month conflict, but backs the assertion that women and children represent a large proportion of those killed. [emphasis added]

So, the UN report is narrowly alleging that 18% of the total number of those killed in Gaza in the war following Hamas’s Oct. 7th massacre have been verified — with 69 percent of those reportedly being women and children.

Further, not even the UN report claims that all those considered “children” are non-combatants, which the international body defines as those 18 and under.

Since 16, 17, and 18 year olds are used by Hamas and other Gaza terror groups as fighters, the percentage of the 3,588 (which the UN lists as children) who are truly non-combatants is unknown.

This is an important distinction, as the Hamas-run Gaza Health Ministry doesn’t distinguish between fighters and civilians when they release their periodically updated death counts. Therefore, the number of women and children killed is often used (incorrectly) by the media as a stand-in for “civilians.”

Finally, as an Associated Press study demonstrated, the death rate for women and children in Gaza declined dramatically beginning in April — that is, at the end point of the UN’s six month report on verified casualties. So, it’s extremely likely that a study of war deaths in the territory in the seven months after April would produce a vastly lower ratio of fatalities for women and children.

We’ve complained to the Guardian asking that the headline be amended to more accurately reflect the actual data from the UN report.

The post How Gaza Casualty Figures Are Being Wildly Distorted first appeared on Algemeiner.com.

Footage of last week’s violent attacks on Israeli soccer fans in Amsterdam has now been circulated widely.

Clips show Maccabi Tel Aviv supporters chased down the city’s canal-lined streets by mobs armed with fireworks.

Many of us have seen the horrifying video of a young fan pleading with his attackers that he is “not Jewish,” as they pummel him with kicks and punches, and also the brutal scenes of Israelis beaten unconscious by thugs shouting slogans like “Free Palestine” and “This is for the children.”

Dutch authorities have confirmed — and messages shared on encrypted apps like Telegram reveal — that the attack on Israeli fans was meticulously planned. Contrary to some claims, this wasn’t a reaction to hooligan behavior by a handful of Maccabi supporters.

More disturbing than the sickening antisemitic violence that happened on the 86th anniversary of Kristallnacht is the media’s indifference to — and, in some cases, tacit justification for — these attacks.

Take The New York Times’ coverage, which initially described the incident as “violence tied to a soccer game,” implying it was run-of-the-mill football hooliganism. Even as the headline referenced the antisemitic nature of the attack, the Times slyly pinned this view on “Israeli authorities,” despite identical conclusions from Dutch police.

Israeli Jews attacked on the streets of Amsterdam. But @nytimes does its best at both sidism, failing to note who the attackers are.

This was not “violence tied to a soccer game” from two sets of fans. This was a pre-planned pogrom against Israelis. pic.twitter.com/JQ6sfhGBU4

— HonestReporting (@HonestReporting) November 8, 2024

Incredibly, a video of a mob hurling projectiles at a Maccabi supporter was still reported as part of “clashes” between rival teams, sanitizing the brutal one-sided attack into a benign scuffle, while Tel Aviv fans singing “Am Yisrael Chai” was termed an “anti-Arab provocation” by the outlet:

Saying “Am Yisrael Chai,” an oft-used Jewish expression of solidarity and affirmation of peoplehood, is now apparently an anti-Arab provocation according to @nytimes.

What is it about Jewish peoplehood that The New York Times finds so offensive?https://t.co/WykXTSBCez pic.twitter.com/4jrP4zXTAh

— HonestReporting (@HonestReporting) November 10, 2024

Then, four days later, The New York Times took its “both sides” narrative even further, publishing an “explainer” suggesting that, even if Israelis were attacked, they somehow invited it. The article opens with an assertion that the mob surrounding a casino — where Israelis were seeking shelter — was there because someone “stole and burned a Palestinian flag.”

Later, the piece even suggests that it only “appears” the attacks were motivated by antisemitism.

Equally worrying is The New York Times’ platforming of Sheher Khan, a Muslim Dutch politician who argues that Israelis should be banned from Amsterdam to avoid “inevitable” demonstrations and confrontations.

Rather than challenging Khan’s grotesque proposal with a call to protect Israelis and Jews from antisemitic mobs, the Times practically endorses it, citing the “political backdrop” as reason enough.

Here’s @nytimes with an “explainer” on how Israeli soccer fans were attacked in Amsterdam. But, naturally, it’s less about explaining and more about subtly implying, right from paragraph one, that these fans somehow “had it coming.” https://t.co/EsRbQLwrZT pic.twitter.com/bY1udfbC8q

— HonestReporting (@HonestReporting) November 11, 2024

Unfortunately, The New York Times’ coverage reflects a broader trend.

Reuters, the Associated Press, and The Guardian also rushed to frame the violence as soccer “clashes,” ignoring the condemnation of what Amsterdam’s mayor Femke Halsema likened to “antisemitic hit-and-run squads.”

“Apparent.”

It was all too apparent to the Israeli Jews attacked in Amsterdam, @Reuters.https://t.co/vIVDgBrdYT pic.twitter.com/Nu041auBvm

— HonestReporting (@HonestReporting) November 8, 2024

Israelis are attacked, not at the soccer match, but on the streets of Amsterdam in a premeditated and targeted lynch.

But @AP turns the Israelis into the provocateurs.https://t.co/X6zfoVXGLB pic.twitter.com/dbXyVYQKpy

— HonestReporting (@HonestReporting) November 8, 2024

 

“Reportedly attacked.”@guardian is so used to falsely portraying Israelis as the sole aggressors, it can’t even categorically state when Israeli Jews are targeted by a lynch mob in Amsterdam.

What next? Israelis “reportedly attacked” on Oct. 7?https://t.co/em4nNK6cBI pic.twitter.com/GanKIbf5XY

— HonestReporting (@HonestReporting) November 8, 2024

The worst reactions, however, came from certain media personalities indulging in grotesque victim-blaming.

For example, former MSNBC host and self-styled moral arbiter Mehdi Hasan took to X to all but justify the pogrom as a natural consequence of the war in Gaza.

There is a coordinated attempt on this hellsite tonight to accuse me of antisemitism because I pointed out (the fact) that Israeli football hooligans started the violence in Amsterdam. That’s not a justification of the violence that followed of course and these attacks on me are…

— Mehdi Hasan (@mehdirhasan) November 10, 2024

Guardian columnist Owen Jones felt compelled to add “context” to the attacks, claiming that Israeli fans chanted “genocidal bile,” effectively suggesting they deserved to be targeted. This angle was eagerly echoed by Novara Media’s Rivkah Brown, who confidently branded Maccabi fans as among the real “culprits.”

You are being lied to about Amsterdam.

Israeli football hooligans attacked local residents and property, and loudly chanted and sang genocidal bile.

The Western media and politicians stripped all this context away – and engaged in rampant, shameless, unhinged deceit. pic.twitter.com/G6g3eNF94j

— Owen Jones (@owenjonesjourno) November 9, 2024

Let’s not be too surprised by Jones, though. This is, after all, the same man who, after watching 47 minutes of footage from the October 7 Hamas massacre, concluded that Israel still hadn’t provided enough proof of horrors like the gang-rape of women and the deliberate killing of children.

What took place in Amsterdam was a brutal wave of antisemitic violence. That’s the reality. And it should be just as simple for the media and their pundits to call it what it was — a modern-day pogrom. Enough with the equivocating.

The author is a contributor to HonestReporting, a Jerusalem-based media watchdog with a focus on antisemitism and anti-Israel bias — where a version of this article first appeared.

The post The New York Times Leads the Way in Negating Amsterdam Pogrom first appeared on Algemeiner.com.